This is not a critisism but a general question. I am curious why people prefer kb/m over gamepad. My thoughts on this is that either way you are playing with an even field (km/m vs km/m or pad vs pad) so there is no unfair competition. The only critisism I have for kb/mouse is that it is too accurate, just point to where you want to shoot, and bullseye. Also my suspicion is that the gamepad requires more dextarity as it is much harder to aim, and in that way is it not more realistic? I totally understand the advantage for RTS games, but apart from the ease of playing (is it habit vs practice) what are the other advantages of kb/mouse over gamepad for shooters?

Well games (on the PC) have always offered KB/M as the primary input system (naturally enough) and it didn't take to long for people to discover this method offered the best accuracy/control.

Having said that, I started out on consoles and prefer the "ease" of simply picking up a gamepad, over having to work with two devices that need to be set on a flat surface. This fact (alone) makes KB/M less accessable, especialy if you are taking about a home-theatre situation.

My vote is for the gamepad.

I use to hate using the controller for FPS, but sometimes it depends on how well the developer implements the controls. I hated the way the aiming felt in Gears, but I though it was perfect in Call of Duty 4 beta.

CoD4 has Halo style sticky aim, where as the aiming in Gears is competely manual.

As for controller vs KB/M, I've seen it go both ways where people have been accustomed to one method and have no intrest in learing the other. I respect the benifts and downfalls of both, though these days I tend to use a controller even for PC games as I find it more comfotable from to use on the couch.

For me, the kbam setup is more natural and immersive. I feel smoothness of kbam is more lifelike. I can pan around smoothly as I would by directing my eyes or by moving my head. With a controller, the is a "jerkiness" to the movement that constantly reminds me that I'm not in the game.

As a PC gamer who just picked up a 360 (for media as much as games) I prefer kbam probably because I have put hundreds if not thousands of hours into FPS gaming on the PC. To me it's just more natural to have my face 1 foot from the monitor and having absolute control over where I aim and shoot.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy Halo 3, but personally it's very frustrating playing relaxed on the couch, 10+ feet from the screen using my thumbs. As a not so completely converted PC gamer, the lack of control is frustrating beyond belief, it's as if I was playing a PC FPS with the controls swapped, left hand on the mouse and right hand on the keyboard. (I am right handed btw) I can get really frustrated when I play against good players because the whole setup is completely unnatural.

Physically I am not used to using thumb, on the PC there is infinite control with the mouse, especially vital when sniping, where at least for a new console gamer I can get nowhere near that type of control with an analog thumbstick.

I guess it comes down to a combination of comfortability and a feeling of absolute control, both are vital for an FPS and it's difficult to swap platforms.

Keyboard/mouse on the pc is alot more precise especially if you have a laser mouse. I prefer that setup but its not practical with a console in most cases.

agreed with all of the other pc gamers. the mouse in particular allows you to dial in your sensitivity on the mouse on the fly whereas with the controller, if i want to look left or right quickly, it doesn't happen.

tum

Old School Gamer here. I've been playing FPS's and RTS's on the PC since the original Castle Wolfenstien (pre Doom era). I never thought I'd like them on a console, which is one reason I never owned a PS1 or 2. The original Xbox broke me of this and the first frag fest with Halo had me hooked. It took a while to get used to the control scheme but once I did I've never looked back. Being able to game on the couch (instead of hunched over a monitor), with my buddies, on a huge screen in full surround sound is much more fun. Xbox live and communicators has also taken social gaming to another level. I remember playing multiplayer on the PC, but the 360 makes it that much easier.

I think the gaming treads are shifting and consoles will be the first release point flip flopping the trend of PC games coming out first. I still like RTS's on PC. Command and Conquer on the 360 looked just as good but the interfaces took a while to get used to. A mouse and keyboard on games like that would still be welcome. To each is own but I now prefer my 360 to my PC. I can buy another 360 for what it takes $$ wise to constantly upgrade my pc to keep up with the titles and I'm in computers for a living. I mean Crysis requires a new rig to have all the bells and whistles on which would be the only way I'd want to play it. I would rather save the money, buy a good 360 game and start the a@@ kicking!

Playing an FPS shooter with a keyboard and mouse to me is akin to driving a racing game with a steering wheel and pedals. Both are much more reactive and precise. Mind you, playing an FPS shooter or racing game with a controller can be accomplished to a high degree of skill. I just think that if you had a contest between the best player with a controller versus the best player with a keyboard and mouse in a death match situation, the keys/mouse player would win because of precision and accuracy of aiming and movement. The guy with the wheel would win in a racing game against the controller player as well, IMHO.

1.Kbam offers a much higher degree of accuracy.

Gamepads add autoaim to fps games and it is more of an all or nothing thing. You just aim in the general direction of the enemy and it either locks on for you or it does not. And if your aim is really good you get a head shot.

On the other hand a kbam allows you pinpoint accuracy where you can shoot exactly where you aim. In some games this increased accuracy can add to the strategy as you can land shots to the extremities, body, or head.

2. Kbam offers much greater speed.

In fps games speed is everything. A gamepad simply cannot offer the same kind of experience. It is slow and sometimes a little clunky by comparison.

Kbam is lightning fast. The UT series is a great example of a game that is meant to be played with quick reflexes and it just feels like a completely different game when you try to play it with a gamepad. (And it is completely different in a bad way)

3. Kbam is obviously vastly superior when it comes to RTS games. They can try to make it work fairly well on a gamepad but it will never really be the same. Nothing more to really say about that genre because it will never change. The gamepad will always be a step behind.

Is this the weekend of thread retreads?

Okay, how about RROD? why lair sucks? why lair is awesome? how to tell if my 360 has falcon? why halo3 sucks? why halo3 is awesome? bioshock's pov? why ps3 has no games? why 360 doesn't need hdmi? why doesn't the 360 have hddvd? why ps3 games suck? why sony will "win the war"? why microsoft will "win the war"?

As for this thread, if you're asking, you don't know. People who say the KBM is too easy and too accurate never really played with it. It still takes a lot of skill, otherwise the games would be no fun and there would be no separation between players. All it takes away is the fudge factor. it's like having a scalpel versus a cleaver. Sure, they both cut, but...

Is this the weekend of thread retreads?

Okay, how about RROD? why lair sucks? why lair is awesome? how to tell if my 360 has falcon? why halo3 sucks? why halo3 is awesome? bioshock's pov? why ps3 has no games? why 360 doesn't need hdmi? why doesn't the 360 have hddvd? why ps3 games suck? why sony will "win the war"? why microsoft will "win the war"?

As for this thread, if you're asking, you don't know. People who say the KBM is too easy and too accurate never really played with it. It still takes a lot of skill, otherwise the games would be no fun and there would be no separation between players. All it takes away is the fudge factor. it's like having a scalpel versus a cleaver. Sure, they both cut, but...

I brought up this topic in case I was missing something. I continuously read in these forums how people are 'refusing to play' 1st person shooters on consoles because it is 'better' with kb/mouse (UT3 is a typical example). I am not debating the kb/mouse vs gamepad when going head to head, I am debating the blind love for kb/mouse. Just as several of you have pointed out, it is what you are used to, that does not make it better. The issues of speed and accuracy are irrelevant when everyone has the same limitations as it again just boils down to practice.

I would venture to state that a 'top player' with a gamepad can easily become a top player with kb/mouse with minimal practice, but the reverse is not true. Similarly when playing a specific game with kb/mouse, and trying to play the same game with pad can be frustrating, but playing a new game should not be as you would not know better.

The purpose of my post was to determine if there is any reason to go back to PC gaming in case i was missing something that I did not already know (better graphics, accuracy, speed) as after making the transition to gampad/console, I prefer the gaming experience over PC (for shooters). (It time for me to get a new computer, and if I do I might splurge for the a machine that can play the latest games (Crysis, UT3 etc) or just get one that will take care of my daily tasks and continue to use the consoles for gaming).

Mouse look gives one advantage for me. Speed of rotation. It's simply impossible to "spin around" with a gamepad. Other than that, gamepads are perfectly fine for my expectations when "just playing a console game". The other annoyance with the dual joystick controller I guess is when I have to remove my thumb from the look joystick to hit buttons. Buttons on a mouse solve that problem.

I would never bother with a gamepad on a PC. Why? Keyboard/mouse is superior in every respect other than "freedom of playing surface". If there was a FPS out for both the console and the PC, I guess it would be a matter of if I want to play the game sitting at a desk in front of a 21" or lounging on the couch in front of the 77". But to me, console = gamepad, PC = keyboard/mouse. Now, if I could use a keyboard/mouse with a console, would I? Don't know, don't have to care, it's not an option.

Mouse is much more stable and accurate for aiming.

I absolutely loathe the keyboard though. Have never gotten very competent with it. Ideal for me would be a mouse plus something like the Wii nunchuck (i.e. a small controller for one hand with a nice analog stick and a couple of buttons.

Worked great on Metroid Prime 3 on the Wii, but the Wiimote isn't near as price as a mouse--though still better than aiming with the right analog stick IMO.

well it's MUCH more accurate control; i actually like gamepads just because they make the game less about accuracy and more about strategy by leveling the playing field a bit (i.e. big target reticle)

It depends on the game and what it's designed for.

Halo: Works better on consoles? Why? The sticky aim system (reticle slows down ever so slightly when it gets over a target) fits a controller perfectly, whereas on the PC the whole thing just felt janky. Also the characters move much slower than most PC shooter characters do.

Team Fortress 2: KBaM is great because it's super accurate and the action is very fact paced, frenetic, and the characters move fast why? Because it was designed with PC in mind. With a controller either the reticle moves to slow and you can't keep pace with the dude moving ten million miles an hour, or it moves to fast and it's near impossible to get precision aiming because your reticle is spasming all across the screen.

I have never been a fan of kb/mouse...why? well just because I was never as good at it as other peeps..lol. I always used a Panther d/c controller with the dreamcast. But i get tired of getting railed to death on Q3

A lot of maneuvers are impossible on the pad. Rocket jumping and trick jumps, for example. In games where players have a lot of agility (Quake, and UT to a lesser degree), mid-air rail/sniping are also near impossible to perform (trying to rail a fast moving pixel with a pad is NOT fun). Although to be fair your opponent cannot be that agile if they are on a pad too (KB/M helps a lot with movement also, especially with games like Quake and its unique physics).

Sure, everyone playing on a pad evens the odds, but it's like you're playing half a game since you literally can't perform half the skills/stunts. It's nothing like the "real" experience. But really that mostly apply to games made for PCs. As previously stated, console shooters like Halo are slower with auto aim to cope with the pad's inadequacies.

A mouse is more accurate than an analog stick, but an analog stick is better than a keyboard for movement. In my opinion:

mouse > controller > keyboard

I hate keyboards and digital movement. Movement was meant to be analog. I also like not having to recenter a controller unlike a mouse. It's the game that matters anyway...

All else being equal, kb/m is more accurate. Even though this has been debated and some folks believe a controller is just as good no one will ever convince me otherwise.

Why, well, think about. With a keyboard and mouse you are on a flat surface. With a controller you are suspended in air with only your hands to steady your movement. Being on a flat surface is superior, it's simple physics! :)

I brought up this topic in case I was missing something. I continuously read in these forums how people are 'refusing to play' 1st person shooters on consoles because it is 'better' with kb/mouse (UT3 is a typical example). I am not debating the kb/mouse vs gamepad when going head to head, I am debating the blind love for kb/mouse. Just as several of you have pointed out, it is what you are used to, that does not make it better. The issues of speed and accuracy are irrelevant when everyone has the same limitations as it again just boils down to practice.




I could probably play basketball with one hand tied behind my back. I could play in a league where EVERYONE has one hand tied behind their backs. Could I get used to it? Maybe. Would I be better if I could use both hands? More than likely. Would I still have fun either way? Sure. Would I prefer one over the other? Definitely.

I have always found it easier to strafe, left and right, while keeping an enemy in my sights when using a KbM setup.

i dont have the dexterity to be accurate with the controller at all, the analog sticks I just cannot seem to master. This leads to huge frustration as I easily adapted to keyboard/mouse on FPS computer games years ago.

CoD4 has Halo style sticky aim, where as the aiming in Gears is competely manual.

As for controller vs KB/M, I've seen it go both ways where people have been accustomed to one method and have no intrest in learing the other. I respect the benifts and downfalls of both, though these days I tend to use a controller even for PC games as I find it more comfotable from to use on the couch.

+1

I go both ways. KB and mouse is superior in a general sense (better pointing control, number and flexibility of buttons for mapping critical game functions), but gamepad is far more comfortable in my living room. So it really depends on how and where I plan to play the game. That's the general debate for me as to if I buy a game for the PC or the 360 (co-op online gameplay or not, achievements, availability of mods, and control scheme- not to mention how much of an $$$ upgrade I might have to sink into my PC to play at acceptable frames...).

As a PC gamer who just picked up a 360 (for media as much as games) I prefer kbam probably because I have put hundreds if not thousands of hours into FPS gaming on the PC. To me it's just more natural to have my face 1 foot from the monitor and having absolute control over where I aim and shoot.


Thats the same reason I prefer kbam. It took me a long time to learn analog sticks and deprogram myself. I'm sure when I go back to PC gaming its going to come right back to me. Not to mention too that kbam is much quicker and more responsive, in general.

i just started playing hl2 orange box on the PC. Since PC gaming has been dead until recently, I haven't played with a kbam for some time. Now I am at heart a PC gamer, and have been for many MANY years. All I can say that within 5 mins into hl2, it was such a refresh to use a control that has no limitations. The gamepad, while I've gotten used to it and I'm not actually that bad with it....I think, well it's toooo SLLLLOOOW.. It as unnatural acceleration "IF" the developer even implements any kind of acceleration, and it just takes forever to aim. Your strategy with a gamepad is such that you are constantly having to work around a bad controller. You, instead of just aiming up/dwn/left/right etc, you end up just leaving the up/dwn where it is, and strafe to get the left/right. it's horrible, and in close combat situations ( ie GOW and those damn screaming things) it's completely frustrating to be dead, not because you suck, but because you are waiting for the controller to actually TURN THE @#@$%% AROUND.

kbam all the way. Isn't it amazing how nobody has come up with something that is the best of both worlds....and dont' say the wii-controller.

another note, I always get a kick out of these discussions. Few points are always to make an appearance.

1. the gamepad is more comfortable as I can sit on the couch in front of the big tv. well that's is fine but don't blame your mouse for bad seating and monitor in your office. We are talking about the controller here, and some of us actually have nice monitors/chairs in front of our pc. Now you can actually use the controller on a Windows machines as well...but wait, do we blame the gamepad then for bad seats too? Just kidding.

2. The gamepad isn't as accurate, so for some reason it's more realistic therefore challenging? WTF? Talk about contradicting statements. I can move my head in any direction while walking and running. A mouse allows me to do the same in a fps. A gamepad would be the equivalent of me thinking...hey, I'll look left....5 seconds later i finish turning my head. More realistic...nope.

To each his own.. I've always preferred the controller. The point and look/aim part of the mouse always felt to easy for me. I dont want to "click" on the person I want to shoot. It just feels unnaturally easy. "Clicking" should be reserved for activating web links.. not for marksmenship.

Just like aim a gun or any weapon in real life.. it should be alot more complicated to line things up.

I can understand people like Keyboard/moust more but I prefer dual analog.

Well if the Wii controls for a fps were implemented well. Something like use the right hand (or left if you're a lefty) for shooint like a light gun (wiimote) and left the movement it could be awesome. Probably why I was excited for Red Steel before reading the reviews. Still I'd be down if they released a light gun with a separate analog stick for a PS3/360 game.

I enjoy FPS console games for the ability to pick up and play while lounging on the couch, but there is always something less satisfying about the experience.

I think it is the lack of immersion that comes when looking at a game world with the limitations of a gamepad. I am the type of gamer who likes to look at my surroundings and become immersed in the setting. With a mouse, if I want to look around, it is as easy as turning my head. On a gamepad I feel as if there is a weight attached to my movements, thus I am immediately reminded that I am using a controller instead of actually "being" there.

Maybe that's why I suck at online shooters- I'm too busy "smelling the roses".